Laserfiche WebLink
i <br /> �� � <br /> STAFF REYORT TO BOARD OF ADNSTMENP <br /> VAAIANCE i31-84 <br /> Date: OctoDer 25, 1984 <br /> Applicant: Frank Konecky <br /> 4402 Thompson <br /> Everett, uA <br /> Location of Property: 4401 Thompeon <br /> Requested Action: A variance to alloa a 59 foot lot <br /> width instead of the require�l 60 <br /> foot for a tvo lot short plat. <br /> Existing Zoning: Single Family Residential <br /> Adjacent Land use/Zoning: North: Single Family/R-1 <br /> South: Single Family/R-1 <br /> East: Single Family/R-1 <br /> WEst: Single Family/R-1 <br /> Exhibits: , <br /> 1. Staff Report <br /> 2. Vicinity map i <br /> 3. Plot Plan ' <br /> 4. Narrative Statement <br /> FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: <br /> 1. That there have been exceptional or extraordinary circumetancee or , <br /> conditiune applying to the rub�ect property or ae to the intended use <br /> ther.eof that do not apply generally to other properties in the same� <br /> vicinity or zone. <br /> Finding: The applicant ovns a parcel of property at 4401 Thompeon. <br /> The lot ie 118 feet �[ midlot point. The applicant could noc ahort <br /> plat his property vithout a variance from midlot point. <br /> Conclueion: Both lote meet zoning code requiremente for deneity; Lot 1 �! <br /> - 9935 and Lot 2 - 9240. <br /> 2. That such variance is neceseary for the preaerva[ion and en�oyment of a <br /> sube[antial property right of the appellant possesaed by the oanere of <br /> o[her properties in the same viciniry or zone. <br /> Finding: The applicant's property ie located in the R-1 zone and is', <br /> being used per that requi.rement. <br /> C�nclusion: The proposed variance would allow the property to be uaed , <br /> in a reasonable manner. <br /> 3. That the authorization of such variance r:ill not be materiallyl <br /> detrimental to the �ublic welfare or in]urious to propezty in the ' <br /> vicinity or zone in which the property is located. <br /> Finding: The exiating lot is 19,355 square feet with a very large side' <br /> yard area. Both proposed lots are approximately 2,000 above the lat <br /> size average for R-1 zone. <br /> Conc'.usion: The variance would no[ have any affect on the area because <br /> of the aize of lots 1 and 2. <br /> 4. That the granting of such variance will not adveraely affect the� <br /> Comprehenaive General Plan. ' <br /> � Findln8: The compreheneive plxn ahowa this area as Single Family� <br /> Resider.tial. <br /> Conclusion: This variance will have no ef.fect on the comprehensive; <br /> plan. <br /> RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE <br /> APPROVE the variance as reques[ed by applican*.. <br />